Daily Adoration and Weekly Confession: The Key to Holy Priests and Bishops

We are in the midst of one of the most horrific crises in Catholic Church history.  The sexual abuse crisis is tearing the Church apart internally and destroying her credibility in the eyes of the world.  Sexual abuse and sexual immorality is like an epidemic tearing through the Church's clergy.  Every day we hear of it somewhere in the world.

As I write this today, September 17, Crux has two more reports of sexual abuse and cover up in the Church.  One report is from the Netherlands: "Over half of Dutch bishops shielded priest-abusers, according to report:

A sensational new report on sexual abuse in the Netherlands claims over half of the bishops in the country from 1945-2010 were involved in either covering up abuse or abusing children themselves.

. . .

The NRC Handelsblad report claims 20 of 39 bishops during the period are implicated in at least covering up abuse, with four auxiliary bishops suspected of abusing minors themselves.

Crux also reports "Chilean hero expelled from priesthood over sex abuse charges."  This is on top of the abuse scandal among the Chilean bishops.

A priest [Father Cristián Precht Bañado] who was once a national hero in Chile, and who now finds himself another casualty of that country’s massive clerical sexual abuse crisis, has been expelled from the priesthood by Pope Francis after being found guilty of abusing minors and vulnerable adults.

Precht is an extremely high profile priest with an impressive resume.  It turns out he has been an abuser for years, even abusing teenagers in confession.

Something has gone seriously wrong with the priesthood in the Catholic Church. We cannot go on with business as usual.  We need to take a long hard look at priests and bishops to try to understand why they have so flagrantly violated the vows and promises they made before man and God.  Why did/do they feel so empowered to sin against the laity and ultimately, against the Holy Spirit?

Slaughter of Innocents in Iraq

Credit:  http://allenbwest.com/

If this picture does not tear you apart inside, then you are made of stone.  The events in Iraq are beyond my comprehension.  I feel that we should all be in constant prayer and mortification about the unspeakable evils that are occurring not only in Iraq, but in many other parts of the world.  I also hang my head in shame as an American, knowing that this is happening as a direct result of our invasion into Iraq.  Saddam Hussein was an evil man, but the evil that has erupted since we invaded and "liberated" that country makes Saddam look like a boy scout.  

I took the picture of this child from former Rep. Allen West's website.  In his article, which you can read HERE, Allen West unfortunately uses this horror to make a political statement, as can be seen in his title, "ISIS Is Beheading Children, and Obama Drops Two Bombs."  Yes, I agree Obama is a total incompetent who is in so far over his head that he can't see straight.  

But that is besides the point.  We could bomb Iraq into oblivion, but that is not going to stop the evil.  Is it just a coincidence that everywhere America goes, Christians are persecuted?  Our beloved land has become an evil country as we have turned our back on our Creator.  We no longer allow Him into "polite society."  We kill our own children in "legal abortions" at the rate of almost 1 million every year.  We want religion to be, at best, a private action, not interfering with our lives.  This is far more than politics.  This is a crisis of the spirit.

The answer to the evil that is happening in Iraq and around the world will not be found in politics. There is no human being who can make things right. The only answer is to go on our knees before Our Creator and beg His mercy and forgiveness for our sins.

Back in 2003, I remember St. John Paul II pleading with President George Bush not to go into Iraq. There is an interesting account of this written by Gerard O'Connell on a website called Kaldaya.net.  

On March 5, 2003 [interestingly, this was Ash Wednesday], Pope John Paul II sent the Italian Cardinal, Pio Laghi, to intervene with President George W. Bush and ask him not to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein, but the US leader rejected the appeal claiming he was “convinced it was God’s will”.

A source close to the situation at that time, but who does not wish to be named because of the position he holds, has given me an account of what happened then based on what the cardinal told him in private.

He recalled how the Polish pope had already referred to this planned military intervention as an “adventure” and had warned that war would have serious consequences for both nations and the world. He said the pope chose Laghi for this delicate mission, because he was a friend of the Bush family and might have stood a better chance of being listened to.

The day before the scheduled meeting with the President, the cardinal was asked to meet with officials from the US State Department, as the President wanted to know the agenda of the meeting in advance. Cardinal Laghi was “interrogated” by the National Security Advisor, Condoleeza Rice, the source said; they spoke “with great clarity and great frankness”.

Condoleeza Rice was also present at the meeting next day when the cardinal met the President. So too were two other members of the National Security Council, as well as General Peter Pace, Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Jim Nicholson, the US Ambassador to the Holy See, and Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, the papal nuncio.

When the Cardinal arrived, the source said, he handed Pope John Paul II’s letter to the President, “who immediately put it on a side table without opening or reading it.”

The President then launched into an argument for war, the source added. He told the cardinal that he, the president, “was convinced it was God’s will”, and sought to convince the papal envoy that it was the right thing to do.

“After a few minutes of what the Cardinal termed ‘a sermon’ ”, the source said Laghi interrupted President Bush and said, “Mr. President, I came here in order to speak to you and to give you a message from the Holy Father and I would like you to listen to me.”

Cardinal Laghi told Bush that three things would happen if the United States went to war, the source recalled. First, it would cause many deaths and injuries on both sides. Secondly, it would result in civil war. And, thirdly, the United States might know how to get into a war, but it would have great difficulty getting out of one.

He told the president that with peace nothing is lost, but with war great turmoil would be created, especially in the Arab world.

He also told President Bush that “the most important issue” in the Middle East is the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis. That has to be dealt with if there is to be peace, the source stated.

As the forty-minute meeting came to a conclusion the President told Laghi, “We are not in agreement on Iraq but we are in agreement on other positions important to the Catholic Church and the Holy Father.”

According to the source, the Cardinal responded, “Yes, the values of promoting life and the family are very important, as they are based on the principles of natural law, human rights and the Gospel. But, Mr. President, I came here to ask you not to go to war, which is another value based on these same principles.”

Cardinal Laghi realized from this exchange that the President had already made up his mind, the source said. This was confirmed shortly afterwards by General Pace, as he accompanied the Cardinal to his car. He shook hands with the Cardinal and told him, “Your Eminence, don’t be afraid. We’ll do it quickly and we will do it in the best way.”

“Laghi knew his mission had failed, but he also realized that the Bush administration was very naïve about the consequences of war “, the source said

He recalled how the press corps was waiting outside the White House after the meeting to interview the cardinal, but administration officials did not allow him to speak to them at the White House. Arrangements to talk to the media had to be hastily made elsewhere.

The next day, March 4, when it was reported that the administration had blocked the Cardinal from speaking to the media at the White house, a person from the State Department called Laghi at the Nunciature in Washington and asked him to clarify with the media that he was not prohibited from giving an interview at the White House. Cardinal Laghi replied, “It is for you to make the clarification as you made the decision.”

Looking at this in hindsight, we can see the great wisdom of St. John Paul II. He had lived through the horror of World War II. He knew that war is never an answer. But President Bush refused to listen to him, and now evil has been unleashed upon the innocents. At the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003, there were 1.5 million Christians in Iraq. In 2013, that number had dropped to 450,000, the drop coming from those who fled the country and those who had been killed. And now the remaining Christians are faced with genocide while the world watches.

We live in the most serious of times. But there is a verse in the Bible that gives me hope: Romans 5:20 - "But where sin increased, grace increased all the more." As the world descends more and more into darkness, we who have been given the grace of forgiveness from Jesus Christ are obligated to rise up in prayerful intervention. We must throw ourselves into prayer as we never have before. The evil we see is going to get worse, and it will eventually come to our land, just as we saw on September 11, 2001. We must be willing to join with the Cross of Jesus Christ as we see exemplified by those in Iraq, Africa and other places of the world giving their lives for their faith.

Revelation 6:9-11:

When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been.

Credit:  bishoysblog.com

Despair Is A Tool Of The Devil

Patrick Archbold of Creative Minority Report recently did a blog post entitled, "Do You See What I See?" [HERE] in which he wrote of his anxiety and outright despair over what he sees as the current condition of the Catholic Church.  He started out with the usual "there has never been a bigger crisis in the Church than we currently face" approach:

Having been born in the 60s, I have no strong recollection, beyond some overheard conversations, of what it must have felt like to witness the tearing down of everything. It must have felt to many that all was ending and that God must surely act to defend His Church from the destruction.

Alas, it was not to be and the destruction continued, most people just cared less.

. . .

I also wondered why so many people, at that time, failed to see it for what it was. They smiled and called it the new springtime even as everything died around them. They called it opening the doors and letting fresh air into the Church, as everybody inside choked on the smoke of Satan. How did they not see what was happening?

I have often wondered what it must have felt like to live through that era. I wonder no more. In fact, I think that perhaps today's high speed death spiral may be worse in some ways. Having never been through it before and unable to see its logical end, many well meaning Catholics perhaps opened themselves up to the false optimism of that era.

Mr. Archbold then writes these statements filled with despair:

I have often pondered this question. Will I live long enough to see the Church fully transmogrified into syncretistic modernized mess it seems hellbent on becoming or will the Church be rescued by the Lord.

As I said, I have often wondered what it must have felt like. I don't wonder that anymore, I know now. The only thing I wonder now is when God will choose to act and rescue us, His Church, from us, His Church.

Such an attitude reminds me very much of those people in the Gospel accounts who surrounded Our Lord. Here was Jesus Christ telling them He was the Savior come to save the world. The people who followed Jesus witnessed miracle after miracle - sight restored to the blind, the deaf healed, the lame walking, demons cast out, dead raised to life - and yet, the disciples of Jesus were constantly doubting Him. This included those closest to Him. The Gospel of John relates the story of Lazarus, who had died, and his sisters, Mary and Martha, who felt that Jesus could have healed their brother, but Jesus delayed His coming to them and Lazarus died. The two sisters did not hesitate to show their disappointment in Jesus.

John 11:17-24:

17 On his arrival, Jesus found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days. 18 Now Bethany was less than two miles from Jerusalem, 19 and many Jews had come to Martha and Mary to comfort them in the loss of their brother. 20 When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed at home.

21 “Lord,” Martha said to Jesus, “if you had been here, my brother would not have died. 22 But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask.”

23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”

24 Martha answered, “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”

Both Mary and Martha felt Jesus had really let them down. When Mary was told that Jesus was there, she ran to see Him, but the first words out of her mouth were, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died." (Verse 32)

Jesus Wept

The next verse tells us that when Jesus saw how mournful the people were, He was "deeply moved in spirit and troubled." (Verse 33). What troubled Jesus? Verse 35 is the shortest verse in the Bible, but it speaks volumes: "Jesus wept." Why? What moved Jesus to tears? He knew what He was about to do. He knew Lazarus would soon be walking among them again. Our Lord did not weep out of pity for Lazarus or for those who mourned him. Our Lord wept because of the unbelief of the people, as shown in His statement to Martha in verse 40:

Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

Why did the people so quickly forget what Jesus had told them? They took their eyes off of Jesus and let their physical circumstances dictate their beliefs. The worst had happened - Lazarus had died - and Jesus had let them down by allowing it to happen. 

Another biblical story that I find very similar to the story of Lazarus is that of Mary Magdalene on Easter morning at the tomb. She had gone to the tomb of Jesus in order to finish anointing His Body. However, Jesus' Body was not in the tomb, and her first thought was that someone had stolen the body. Even though Jesus had said many times that He would rise from the dead, Mary was so overwhelmed by the shock of what had happened three days before and by her own grief at losing Jesus that she never gave a thought to Jesus' statements. As far as she was concerned, Jesus was dead and the dream was over. Even though Jesus stood right next to her in the garden, her unbelief was so profound that she did not recognize Him. I wonder how often we allow ourselves to be so overwhelmed by despair that, like Mary Magdalene, we cannot recognize Jesus even though He is right next to us.

Later that same day, Our Lord appeared to two disciples on the road to Emmaus.  These disciples were filled with grief and despair at the death of Jesus Christ. Jesus came right up to them and asked what they were talking about (Luke 24:17-18).

They stood still, their faces downcast. One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?”

Again, like Mary Magdalene, these two disciples allowed themselves to be so overwhelmed with grief that they did not recognize Jesus Christ when He was literally standing in their midst and talking with them.

The disciples and Jesus on the road to Emmaus

Many look at the current condition of the Church and of the world, and despite their professed belief in Jesus Christ, they tend to despair, as expressed by Patrick Archbold.  We stand in the garden with Mary Magdalene with Jesus Christ right beside us and wail, "Where have they taken My Lord?"  We need to read and re-read the words of St. Paul, who suffered persecution and setbacks far beyond what we have experienced.  This is what he wrote:

Romans 8:5-6:

Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace.

Verse 15:

The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again.

Verses 31-32:

What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?

St. Paul is telling us that as long as we are in Christ, we can't lose.  The trick is to keep our eyes on heaven and not on things of the earth.  Patrick Archbold would do well, instead of wringing his hands in despair, to instead look to the words of Jesus Christ who said, "The gates of hell will never prevail against the Church."  (Matthew 16:18)  Our Lord promised never to leave us.  (Matthew 28:20)  He also sent the Third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, to guide and lead us into all truth.  (John 15:26).

We know every time we enter a Catholic Church that Jesus is in the tabernacle waiting for us. We know that His Blessed Mother is constantly interceding on our behalf. If she was willing to ask Her Son to save a wedding party when they ran out of wine, can we doubt for a moment that she is constantly asking her Divine Son to save our souls? All she asks of us is "Do whatever He tells you." And what does Jesus tell us? He commands us to trust Him and believe His Words.

Our Lord literally poured out His Life Blood for us, facing the worst cruelty of men so that we could be saved from sin and spend eternity with Him. His love for us is so big the universe itself cannot hold it. How can we insult Him by wondering, as Patrick Archbold did, "Will I live long enough to see the Church fully transmogrified into syncretistic modernized mess it seems hellbent on becoming or will the Church be rescued by the Lord." How can Patrick Archbold or anyone else look at Christ on the Cross and ask such a question?

Pope St. John Paul II once said,

“Do not abandon yourselves to despair. We are the Easter people and hallelujah is our song.”

St. John Paul II lived through the horror of World War II.  He saw death and destruction on a massive scale.  He himself came close to death many times.  And yet he told us never to despair but to always trust in the Lord.  Our despair will blind us to Christ and that could be deadly to our souls.  St. John Paul II wrote this prayer:

Jesus, I trust in You! With God nothing is impossible! What is especially possible is conversion, which can change hatred into love and war into peace. And so our prayer becomes all the more insistent and trusting: Jesus, I trust You!

Despair is actually a form of pride. Despair says to God, you're just not big enough. This storm that we are facing is too big for you to handle. The great sin of Judas was not his betrayal of Jesus Christ. St. Peter also betrayed Jesus and he went on to become the first pope. Peter owned up to what he did, received the great mercy and forgiveness of Jesus Christ, and became a great saint. Judas looked at what he did and gave into hopelessness. Who knows what great things Judas could have accomplished if he had not allowed despair to destroy him.

I have to say that I find most Catholic blogs and websites to be extremely depressing. Instead of spreading the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ, we are mostly given the news about the great sins of the church and how it is all pretty much hopeless. We act as if this was the first time in Church history that we have ever had to contend with sinful human beings. If Our Lord had wanted the church to be run by perfect beings, He could have put angels in charge. We would never have to worry about any sex abuse scandals or wayward priests or bishops. Angels would always have the courage and wherewithal to stand up for the truth, never flinching, never backing down. They would always do and say the right thing.

Instead, Our Lord gave us weak sinful men and said, listen to them and do what they tell you to do. Further, Jesus tells us that He takes very personally the way in which these men are treated:

Very truly I tell you, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me. (John 13:20)

And:

Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me (Luke 10:16)

We all have our own ideas of how the Church should be run. When things don't meet our expectations and demands, we whine and complain and, like Chicken Little, declare that the sky is falling, even though Jesus promised such a thing will never happen in the Church.

The next time you feel compelled to sit in judgment of those who have been put in authority in the church, remember that Jesus Christ says you are sitting in judgment of Him. Oh, I know all of the arguments that we have a right and even a duty to criticize our prelates. But this should be done only after deep, prayerful consideration and learning as much as we can about any situation, and not just believing every word we read on some website or blog. It should also be done in charity and with great regard for the soul of the person we are criticizing and if at all possible, it should be done in private. The devil is a cunning foe, and he knows just how to ensnare us. The enemy feeds on negativity, and anytime we give in to and act on negative thoughts, we are giving into Satan himself.

Patrick Archbold concluded his post with the following comment:

**Note. If you don't sympathize or understand this post, that's fine. Just let it go please. Anyone who chooses to use the comment box to mock me and my fellow travellers will be deleted and likely banned. So again, just let it go please.

I am certainly not trying to mock Archbold or anyone else.  But I have to say that I do get very tired of all those who see nothing but negativity and destruction in the Church.  This is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, who is the Chief Cornerstone.  This Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.  The gates of hell have certainly stormed the church over and over again down through the centuries, but have never once prevailed.  The Church is indestructible.  Never believe anyone who tries to tell you differently.  As I John 4:4 tells us, He who is in you is stronger than he who is in the world.

Patrick Archbold says that he cannot understand those who persist in optimism at this time in church history.  I think the optimists are the only people we should be listening to.  That is not to say that we should not acknowledge and admit our problems and the challenges facing us.  But we should never let that govern our actions or thoughts.  Our two most recently canonized saints - Popes St. John XXIII and John Paul II - were always optimistic and based their papacies on this optimism and faith in Jesus Christ.  We need to listen to them.

In the 1960's Leslie Gore sang, "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to."  Well, this is NOT your party and if you want to cry, you are going to find yourself on the outside.  Despair will often knock on our doors and demand to be let in. We need to immediately take that to our Lord and ask Him to cast it out of our hearts.  There is no room for despair in the life of a follower of Jesus Christ.

This is from one of the greatest optimists in Church history:

No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (St. Paul to the Romans, chapter 8:37-39) 

Sts. John XXIII and John Paul II: Lessons in Suffering and Self Abandonment

We now have two new saints enrolled in heaven, Pope St. John XXIII and Pope St. John Paul II. Pope Francis gave a beautiful sermon in the canonization Mass that sheds much light on the role of the Church in the world today. Being that it was Divine Mercy Sunday, the Holy Father's sermon focused on the great message of Divine Mercy, which I believe, as I have already stated many times, to be the driving force behind the contemporary Catholic Church. I don't believe we can understand or be a part of the Catholic Church today unless we understand this great message as given to St. Faustina.

Divine Mercy is deeply and intimately connected with the Passion of Jesus Christ. The Mercy of Our Lord cannot be understood apart from His Suffering. We receive the Mercy and Forgiveness of Jesus by partaking in His Suffering:

“There is more merit to one hour of meditation on My sorrowful Passion than there is to a whole year of flagellation that draws blood; the contemplation of My painful wounds is of great profit to you, and it brings Me great joy.” (Diary 369)

“There are few souls who contemplate My Passion with true feeling; I give great graces to souls who meditate devoutly on My Passion.” (Diary 737)

“My mercy is greater than all the sins of the world… For you I descended from Heaven to earth; for you I allowed Myself to be nailed to the Cross; for you I let My Sacred Heart be pierced with a lance, thus opening wide the source of mercy for you. Come then with trust and draw graces from this fountain… I never reject a contrite heart … You will give Me pleasure if you hand over all your troubles and griefs. I shall heap upon you the treasures of My grace.” (Diary 1485)

“But there is no way to heaven except the Way of the Cross. I followed it first. You must learn that it is the shortest and surest way…“I endured that too when My soul was crushed in mortal anguish at the Garden of Olives… I am giving you a share in those sufferings because of My special love for you and in view of the high degree of holiness I am intending for you in heaven. A suffering soul is closest to My heart.” (Diary 1487)

The gospel reading on Divine Mercy Sunday is the story of doubting Thomas, who was not present the first time the Resurrected Lord appeared to the apostles in the upper room.  It is interesting to note that when our Lord first appeared to the apostles in the upper room, He identified Himself by His Wounds, which He will carry with Him for all eternity.  John 20:19-20:

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.

Thomas refused to believe Christ was alive and stated, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” (John 20:24). And once again, when Our Lord appeared with Thomas present, Jesus identified Himself by His Wounds.  John 20:26-27:

A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”

Thomas responded with the famous statement that we still use when we behold Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament:  "My Lord and My God."

Shroud of Turin

If we are to know Jesus Christ and be His true followers, we must know Him through His Suffering and His Wounds.   Our Lord has given us an actual physical artifact showing His Wounds in a way that has astounded even nonbelieving scientists, and that is the Shroud of Turin.  Many scientists have spent their entire lives studying this cloth because there is nothing else like it in all of creation.  It is not a painting and not a photograph.  In 1978, a group of scientists, many of whom were atheists and certainly no believers in the Shroud, were given physical access to the Shroud to study it and compile data with the sole purpose of discovering what made the image.  In 1981, they issued their final report, which you can read HERE:

No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by adevice known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.

The conclusion of these scientists:

Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery.

We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The bloodstains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved.

Over 30 years later, the Shroud remains a mystery.  However, it has been studied by forensic scientists who conclude it is absolutely anatomically correct and shows a man who was ruthlessly tortured and whipped, with 120 scourge marks found on his body, signs of crucifixion through the wrists and feet, a crown of thorns thrust on his head and a spear wound to his side, as stated in this paper released by THE THIRD DALLAS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THE SHROUD OF TURIN: DALLAS, TEXAS, SEPTEMBER 8-11, 2005 [HERE]:

Although not all scientists are unanimous, it has been shown by many scientists that the linen sheet enveloped or wrapped the corpse of a man who had been scourged, crowned with thorns, crucified with nails, and stabbed by a lance in the side. Also impressed are many other marks due to blood, fire, water and folding, which have greatly damaged the double body image. Of greatest interest are the wounds which, to forensic pathologists, appear to be unfakeable.

Just as Our Lord appeared to the apostles and then to Doubting Thomas and identified Himself by His Wounds, in the same way He has identified Himself down through the ages and to us today, 2000 years after His Death and Resurrection.  

This was the primary message that Pope Francis gave us at the canonization Mass of Sts. John XXIII and John Paul II.   

Pope Francis began his homily by stating that the "glorious wounds of the risen Jesus" are at the heart of Divine Mercy Sunday:

At the heart of this Sunday, which concludes the Octave of Easter and which John Paul II [at the specific request of Jesus Christ to St. Faustina] wished to dedicate to Divine Mercy, are the glorious wounds of the risen Jesus. He had already shown those wounds when he first appeared to the Apostles on the very evening of that day following the Sabbath, the day of the resurrection. But Thomas was not there that evening, and when the others told him that they had seen the Lord, he replied that unless he himself saw and touched those wounds, he would not believe. A week later, Jesus appeared once more to the disciples gathered in the Upper Room, and Thomas was present; Jesus turned to him and told him to touch his wounds.  Whereupon that man, so straightforward and accustomed to testing everything personally, knelt before Jesus with the words: "My Lord and my God!” (Jn 20:28).

Pope Francis then explains the contradictory nature of the Wounds of Jesus, that they are a scandal and stumbling block and at the same time, they are the test of our faith.  Christ will carry these wounds on His Glorified Body for all eternity:

The wounds of Jesus are a scandal, a stumbling block for faith, yet they are also the test of faith. That is why on the body of the risen Christ the wounds never pass away: they remain, for those wounds are the enduring sign of God’s love for us. They are essential for believing in God. Not for believing that God exists, but for believing that God is love, mercy and faithfulness. Saint Peter, quoting Isaiah, writes to Christians: "by his wounds you have been healed” (1 Pet 2:24, cf. Is 53:5).

Pope Francis tells us that we cannot believe Christ, we cannot have faith in the salvation He offers us apart from His Passion and Wounds.  The Wounds of Jesus Christ impart to us the belief that "God is love, mercy and faithfulness."  Both John XXIII and John Paul II willingly and lovingly embraced the Suffering Lord, and they saw the Suffering Lord in all men everywhere.  This is the great message we can learn from these two saints:

John XXIII and John Paul II were not afraid to look upon the wounds of Jesus, to touch his torn hands and his pierced side. They were not ashamed of the flesh of Christ, they were not scandalized by him, by his cross; they did not despise the flesh of their brother (cf. Is 58:7), because they saw Jesus in every person who suffers and struggles. These were two men of courage, filled with the parrhesia of the Holy Spirit, and they bore witness before the Church and the world to God’s goodness and mercy. 

This message of the Suffering Jesus, who took on the sins of the world and healed us through His Suffering, has always been the message of the Church, but it has received even greater emphasis in the 20th Century and now 21st Century. John XXIII and John Paul II experienced firsthand the suffering of modern man. This produced not bitterness and anger in them, but great love and compassion because they identified so strongly with the Suffering Lord:

They were priests, bishops and popes of the twentieth century. They lived through the tragic events of that century, but they were not overwhelmed by them. For them, God was more powerful; faith was more powerful – faith in Jesus Christ the Redeemer of man and the Lord of history; the mercy of God, shown by those five wounds, was more powerful; and more powerful too was the closeness of Mary our Mother. 

Pope Francis explains in greater detail just how the Suffering Jesus gave hope and joy to our two newest saints and allowed them rise above the suffering and misery that surrounded them and filled them with such a great love for all people.  For John XXIII and John Paul II, like all saints, their great joy and hope was born from the suffering they willingly endured in their lives and which led them to the hope and joy of Easter and filled them with the Love of God:

In these two men, who looked upon the wounds of Christ and bore witness to his mercy, there dwelt a living hope and an indescribable and glorious joy (1 Pet 1:3,8). The hope and the joy which the risen Christ bestows on his disciples, the hope and the joy which nothing and no one can take from them. The hope and joy of Easter, forged in the crucible of self-denial, self emptying, utter identification with sinners, even to the point of disgust at the bitterness of that chalice. Such were the hope and the joy which these two holy popes had received as a gift from the risen Lord and which they in turn bestowed in abundance upon the People of God, meriting our eternal gratitude.  

Pope Francis takes us back to the very beginning of the Church and shows that the same hope and joy shown by Sts. John XXIII and John Paul II were in the first believers in Jerusalem.  It is the same Spirit which has filled the Church for 20 centuries:

This hope and this joy were palpable in the earliest community of believers, in Jerusalem, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles (cf. 2:42-47). It was a community which lived the heart of the Gospel, love and mercy, in simplicity and fraternity.

Pope Francis now ties in the Second Vatican Council to this beautiful message of hope and joy which we receive from the Suffering Christ. As Pope Francis tells us, it is the saints - those who have been sanctified and made one with the Suffering Christ - "who give direction and growth to the Church." Our Lord has always chosen to speak to us through His Saints, and that is a major reason why the Church formally recognizes saints through canonization, so that we will know that these are people who have been given a special message to which we must pay attention. To disregard the message of formally declared saints will bring judgment upon us:

This is also the image of the Church which the Second Vatican Council set before us. John XXIII and John Paul II cooperated with the Holy Spirit in renewing and updating the Church in keeping with her pristine features, those features which the saints have given her throughout the centuries. Let us not forget that it is the saints who give direction and growth to the Church. 

As Pope Francis now tells us, John XXIII was the tool of the Holy Spirit when he convened the Second Vatican Council.  The Holy Spirit was leading and guiding the Church.  Pope Francis tells us that the greatest service of John XXIII was his "openness to the Spirit," a great lesson for all of us:

In convening the Council, John XXIII showed an exquisite openness to the Holy Spirit. He let himself be led and he was for the Church a pastor, a servant-leader. This was his great service to the Church; he was the pope of openness to the Spirit. 

Pope Francis tells us that John Paul II was the great defender of the family, the one who defended the sanctity of life.  The Church is continuing this defense of the family in the Synod later this year.  I know many think that great heresies will come from the Synod, but if anyone actually believes that, then they are doubting the very words and promises of Jesus Christ:

In his own service to the People of God, John Paul II was the pope of the family. He himself once said that he wanted to be remembered as the pope of the family. I am particularly happy to point this out as we are in the process of journeying with families towards the Synod on the family. It is surely a journey which, from his place in heaven, he guides and sustains. 

Pope Francis summarizes the points in his homily, urging us to be open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and enter ever more deeply into the "mystery of divine mercy":

May these two new saints and shepherds of God’s people intercede for the Church, so that during this two-year journey toward the Synod she may be open to the Holy Spirit in pastoral service to the family. May both of them teach us not to be scandalized by the wounds of Christ and to enter ever more deeply into the mystery of divine mercy, which always hopes and always forgives, because it always loves.

There is a beautiful message from Jesus Christ to St. Faustina as recorded in her diary which very much echoes the words of our Holy Father, and which we should take to heart.  We must be willing to humble ourselves, to make ourselves small as St. Therese of Lisieux said so many times.  If we think that we have all the answers and refuse to listen to His Church, we may well be cutting ourselves off from the saving grace and mercy of Jesus Christ. Remember, the entire message of Divine Mercy can be summarized in five words:  Jesus, I Trust In You.

My child, make the resolution never to rely on people. Entrust yourself completely to My will saying, “Not as I want, but according to Your will, O God, let it be done unto me.” [these are the words of Jesus Christ as He suffered in the garden] These words, spoken from the depths of one's heart, can raise a soul to the summit of sanctity in a short time. In such a soul I delight. Such a soul gives Me glory. Such a soul fills heaven with the fragrance of her virtue. But understand that the strength by which you bear sufferings comes from frequent Communions. So approach this fountain of mercy often, to draw with the vessel of trust whatever you need. (Diary 1487)

Credit:  quotes-pictures.vidzshare.net

Pope Paul VI To Be Declared Venerable

Pope Paul VI

I just recently saw the headline that Pope Paul VI is to be declared venerable on December 20.  I searched around the Internet to look for commentary on this story, and surprisingly at first found next to nothing.  The following is from Romereports.com and repeated on several different websites:

December 14, 2012. (Romereports.com) (-VIDEO ONLY-) On December 20, Benedict XVI will declare former Pope Paul VI venerable. Cardinals belonging to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints approved on December 10 a report on the heroic virtues of Paul VI.

The former Pope had a very important role in the Second Vatican Council. The acceptance of his heroic virtues falls exactly 50 years since the start of the Second Vatican Council.

The beatification of Pope John Paul II caused no small controversy in the Church.  More than a few of my traditional Catholic friends had some serious problems with it, feeling John Paul II had not been faithful to the teachings of the Church.  Many Traditionalists feel even more strongly that Pope Paul VI was the cause of many evils in the Church because of, among other things, his introduction of the Novus Ordo Mass in 1969.

At first I didn't see any reaction from the Catholic blogosphere on this story, but now the first rumblings are starting to emerge with a posting from A Reluctant Sinner which can be found here.  Many felt that the beatification of John Paul II was basically a political move on the part of the Vatican, and A Reluctant Sinner seems to feel this is also true in regard to Pope Paul VI:

The near infallible Andre Tornielli ('Vatican Insider',La Stampa) reported last week that the Congregation for the Causes of Saints has “given the go ahead for [Pope] Paul VI’s beatification.” On 10 December, it seems that the Congregation’s cardinals and bishops voted unanimously in favour of recognising the ‘heroic virtues’ of Giovanni Battista Montini -- who was Pope from 1963-78.

This means it is highly likely that Pope Benedict XVI will now promulgate a decree of heroic virtues, granting the Conciliar and post-Conciliar Pope Paul the title ‘Venerable’. It is expected that the Holy Father will issue this decree on or soon after 20 December, when he is next scheduled to meet Cardinal Angelo Amato, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.

According to Tornielli, Pope Benedict XVI is very keen to beatify his predecessor before the end of the Year of Faith, which closes on the Feast of Christ the King 2013. The Italian Vaticanologist explains that 2013 marks the 50th anniversary of Montini’s election as Pope and is also the 35th anniversary of his death. He also reports that there are already two miracles attributed to Pope Paul VI’s intercession – one involving the healing of an unborn child and the other the miraculous and unexplained restoration to health of a nun who had a tumour.

It is my understanding that when the Pope beatifies or canonizes someone, this is an act of infallibility, not a calculated political move.  We may not understand or intellectually accept what the Pope does, but the fact is that the Holy Spirit will not allow the Vicar of Christ to mislead the Church.  We either believe this or we don't.  Mt. 16:19 tells us this: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.."

This being the case, I'm not quite sure how Reluctant Sinner can make the following statement:

Though no expert in the rather eccentric[?] field of canonisation [thank you for this admission], I am a bit uneasy at the way modern popes seem obsessed with raising their immediate predecessors to the Altars [and as a lay person, it matters what you think because . . .?]. It makes me think of the Roman Emperors, who would more often than not deify the Caesar who had been reigning just before them. Sometimes, and for the sake of decency, then, I feel it might be better to be a bit less hasty about these things – there is nothing wrong in waiting centuries before declaring someone a saint. Fast-track beatifications and canonisations can, sometimes at least, prove to be a source of confusion.

St. Gregory the Great

Hmmm.   Canonization is an "eccentric field"?  Plus, I have to admit, I'm very uncomfortable with comparing the Vicar of Christ beatifying his predecessor with Roman Emperors deifying Caesar.  Is it really the job of the laity to offer our opinion about what the Pope should do "for the sake of decency" and that we feel "it might be better to be a bit less hasty about these things"?  Reluctant Sinner feels "there is nothing wrong in waiting centuries before declaring someone a saint."  I wonder how Reluctant Sinner would have felt had he been alive at the time of the canonization of St. Anthony of Padua, who was canonized less than a year after his death, or St. Gregory the Great, who was declared a saint on the day of his death.  Does Reluctant Sinner feel these were "sources of confusion"?

After offering these opinions, Reluctant Sinner admits that he knows very little about "Montini" as he refers to Pope Paul VI.  (I find it interesting that those who are critical of popes will often refer to them using their surnames instead of their papal titles, a practice I find very disrespectful):

I do not know much about Montini. To be honest, I have never really felt the urge to seek his heavenly intercession, and I don't know many who have. What did he do that was so saintly, bar being pope, which is not a guarantee of personal holiness? Of course, he did publish Humanae Vitae in the face of strong opposition from liberals and modernists in the Church, and he also recognised that Marian devotion had all but disappeared under his watch, and tried correcting this tragic loss. He also appeared to have been a simple man, and a man of prayer.

Is Reluctant Sinner telling us that no one should be beatified or canonized unless he or she is popular among the Church laity?  I didn't realize that was a requirement.  I will admit that it is rather generous of Reluctant Sinner to give some credit to Pope Paul VI for doing a "few" good things, such as publishing Humanae Vitae, which as I have stated on this blog, is arguably the most important document of the 20th Century.

Liturgical abuse which become all too common in the Church

Ah, and now come the arguments I was waiting for.

But, it could be argued that the Church suffered near collapse during his pontificate, as the decrees of the Second Vatican Council were implemented in a way we now know to have been contrary to the real mind of the Church. Liturgical abuses went viral soon after the promulgation of the Missal of Paul VI, whilst Marxist ideology and lack of discipline infiltrated se  minaries, and priests and nuns abandoned their vocations in droves. And, of course, traditional Catholics were virtually persecuted within their own Church during Montini's [again using his surname] pontificate, as those attached to the 'old Mass' had to metaphorically take to the catacombs! (I am not suggesting he was behind the purge of the old rite [that's kind of you], just that it seemed most virulent and unchecked during his reign.)

As we know, Paul VI was aware of the chaos that was causing such confusion to the faithful in the 1960s and 70s, which led so many souls out of the Church. He was concerned about the dark clouds that had blackened the post-Conciliar skies. He famously announced, after going into a sort of trance[?] during his homily (see here) for the Feast of St Peter and St Paul 1972, that: ‘By some fissure, the smoke of Satan has entered into the Church.’ He therefore knowingly tried to steer the Barque of Peter through some of the stormiest seas the Church has ever seen. Some say he often went off course, whilst others think he did what was needed at the time.

The Magesterium of the
Church has been faithfully
guided by the Holy Spirit
since the first Pentecost

"Some say he went off course"?  Why would we listen to anyone who makes such a statement and, even more to the point, why would you repeat it?  We were promised by our Lord Himself that the Vicar of Christ cannot "go off course."  That is not to say that he cannot personally jump the track, but he can never lead the Church astray.  See above, Matthew 16:19.

Reluctant Sinner goes on to say that "It is a Christian hope that all members of the Church, all the baptised, will one day become saints."  He admits that there are many saints in heaven who are unknown to us on earth. He also says that most souls will have to spend time in Purgatory and that not all men are saved, which is undoubtedly true. But what has all of this to do with the Vicar of Christ declaring someone venerable?

Reluctant Sinner then goes on to give us more of his opinion:

Having said all that, then, I find it odd that nearly every pope from the time of the Second Vatican Council onwards has been fast-tracked to sainthood. Surely, there are holier popes than these -- ones who have been hanging about, waiting for canonisation, or just some form of recognition, for centuries? What about Blessed Urban II, when will he finally be canonised? What about Leo XIII, a great man indeed, or the angelic Venerable Pope Pius XII? And what about all the other saintly bishops, priests, religious, and lay men and women who already have popular cults, but whose canonisation processes have ground to a bureaucratic halt?

Again, this makes it sound like canonization has become a political move rather than an infallible act of the Pope, which I find to be a very disconcerting statement.  It is not the job of the laity to decide who should or should not be canonized.  I believe offering opinions such as these shed no light whatsoever on the subject and serve only to cause more division in the Church.

And now Reluctant Sinner give us what has become the stereotypical description about the state of the Church since Vatican II.

Since Vatican II, the Church has suffered greatly. The past 50 years have brought little light and an awful amount of darkness and distress for the Catholic Church. Surely, then, it seems a little strange to be rushing to raise some men to the Altars whose pontificates were not that great compared to some others. In centuries to come, will it be said that Papa Montini's [Papa Montini?] reign was one of truly happy memory?

Pope Paul VI
wearing Papal Tiara

Who are we, the laity, to decide which pontificates are "greater" than others?  And what's with the disrespectful "Papa Montini" crack?

Even though I labeled it "stereotypical", I certainly agree that the last 50 years of the Church have been a time of great upheaval.  I have done other posts on this blog about what some say is an unprecedented crisis of faith in the Church.

This crisis has produced basically two groups seemingly in direct opposition to one another, but I feel are, in reality, two sides of the same coin.  Progressives see the questioning of authority and the breakdown of traditional beliefs and practices in the Church as a good thing.  They feel it is time to bring the church up to date and more in line with contemporary needs and mores of our modern culture.

Then, of course, there are the "Traditionalists" at the other end of the spectrum who feel that anything that happened from Vatican II on is suspect and almost no one in the Church hierarchy, from the Pope on down, is to be trusted.  Some seem to believe that Our Lord has basically lost control of His own Church.  They may not realize that this is what they are saying, but when we read such commentary as we have seen here from Reluctant Sinner, there can be no other conclusion.  To even suggest that a pope "went off course" is to call Jesus Christ a liar, who told us that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church.

The unifying factor between these two groups is rejection of authority.

Since we know that the Pope cannot go against the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, we have to ask why we have seen all these troubling events.  Why has our Lord allowed these things to happen in the Church?  Why is the Church of 2012 (almost 2013) seemingly so different from the Church of 1962?

I believe that our Lord has given us the answer to this question in the Old Testament, more specifically in the ancient Israelites' journey from Egypt, where they had been held as slaves, to the Promised Land, a land "flowing with milk and honey".

Moses parting the Red Sea

Moses, who was chosen to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, was most definitely a man of God.  Yet the Israelites, under Moses' guidance, were constantly rebelling against God and being punished for it.  The first sign of rebellion among the Israelites happened as soon as they departed from Egypt.  God, under the leadership of Moses, led the Israelites out of Egypt straight to the Red Sea, putting the Israelites between the Red Sea and Pharaoh's army, which was in hot pursuit.

From Exodus 14:

¹⁰ As Pharaoh approached, the Israelites looked up, and there were the Egyptians, marching after them. They were terrified and cried out to the Lord. ¹¹ They said to Moses, “Was it because there were no graves in Egypt that you brought us to the desert to die? What have you done to us by bringing us out of Egypt? ¹² Didn’t we say to you in Egypt, ‘Leave us alone; let us serve the Egyptians’? It would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the desert!”

Now granted, things did not look good for the Israelites.  It looked like their choice was to drown in the Red Sea or be killed by Pharaoh's army.  But remember, they had just seen tremendous miracles that caused Pharaoh to allow them to leave.  They had just gone through the first Passover when the first born of all creatures, both human and animal, in the entire land of Egypt were destroyed by the angel of death, save for the Israelites, who were not touched.  Despite having just seen the Hand of God in freeing them from slavery to the Egyptians, the Israelites started moaning and complaining and accusing Moses, who was chosen by God, of leading them directly to their deaths.

Are we really any different than the ancient Israelites?  Our Lord came down from heaven, took on the form of a man, died and rose from the dead, freed us from slavery to the devil and to our own fallen nature, and gave us the Gift of the Holy Spirit, who is the Third Person of God, to guide, lead and comfort us at all times.  He gave the Keys to the Kingdom to Peter and all of his successors and promised that the gates of hell would never prevail against the Church.  In 2000 years of history great nations have risen and fallen, and the Church has persevered, always coming through the ashes stronger than before.

Yet, like the Israelites who, as soon as they were faced with difficulty immediately forgot all the Lord had done for them, so we too forget all that the Lord has done for us in the last 2000 years: the great miracles and saints, the unswerving protection and guidance.  We moan and complain and accuse the one chosen and led by the Holy Spirit of basically leading us to our spiritual deaths.

"But," some say, "what about all of the terrible things that have happened in the past 50 years?  Pope Paul VI basically dismantled 2000 years of church history.  And now we're going to canonize this 'Montini' guy?  This is not venerable but scandalous!"

So why would our Lord, who promised that the gates of hell would never prevail against the Church, allow so much scandal to occur?

Again, the answer can be found with the ancient Israelites.

Israelites worshiping the golden calf

Shortly after God rescued the Israelites from Pharaoh's army by parting the Red Sea and then drowning Pharaoh and his army in that same Red Sea, Moses went up to Mount Sinai for 40 days to receive the Law of God.  During his absence, the Israelites became restless and not knowing what had happened to Moses, decided to take matters into their own hands.  They made a golden calf and pronounced this the god who had freed them from slavery in Egypt.  They then began partying "like it was 1999," to borrow a phrase, engaging in all kinds of debauchery.  From Exodus 32:

¹⁹ When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain. ²⁰ And he took the calf the people had made and burned it in the fire; then he ground it to powder, scattered it on the water and made the Israelites drink it.

This seems rather odd, that Moses would make the people drink the golden calf, but this says to me that he is saying to them that if they wanted their own god, he would allow them to have it in full force and see what this "god" was really made of, that it was no "god" at all.  Also at this point our Lord was telling Moses that he was ready to destroy all of the Israelites and give the Promised Land to Moses' descendants.  Moses interceded on behalf of the people and God relented.  However, the Israelites still paid a heavy price when Moses sent the Levites through the camp to kill the worst of the sinners - about 3000 people - and the Lord struck the Israelites with a plague, killing even more.

God sent quail on
ancient Israel

A similar thing happened when the Israelites started complaining that they were bored with the manna which the Lord gave them everyday from heaven.  They complained that they wanted meat.  Moses said, okay, you want meat, you'll get it until it comes out of your nostrils.  Numbers 11:

18 The Lord heard you when you wailed, “If only we had meat to eat! We were better off in Egypt!” Now the Lord will give you meat, and you will eat it. ¹⁹ You will not eat it for just one day, or two days, or five, ten or twenty days, ²⁰ but for a whole month—until it comes out of your nostrils and you loathe it—because you have rejected the Lord, who is among you, and have wailed before him, saying, “Why did we ever leave Egypt?”   

Again, when the Israelites rebelled against God, the answer was to give them exactly what they asked for, to let them see the full consequences of their actions.  They rejected the manna from heaven and wanted their own food instead.  So our Lord gave them what they asked for.

Pope Leo XIII

How does this story about meat and manna and the ancient Israelites relate to the crisis of faith in the Church?  The crisis of faith we now see in the Church is not something that just spontaneously occurred after Vatican II.  This crisis of faith can be defined by the term "Modernism".  Wikipedia actually has a pretty good definition:  "Modernism refers to theological opinions expressed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but with influence reaching into the 21st century, which are characterized by a break with the past. Catholic modernists form an amorphous group. The term "modernist" appears in Pope Pius X's 1907 encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis."  Modernism has been a creeping infection in the Church for over 100 years, and is something that Popes have been speaking out against since the time of Pope Leo XIII in the 1800's.  As noted, Pope Pius X wrote the famous encyclical, PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS in 1907 warning about the dangers of Modernism.  Pope St. Pius X also was the one who instituted the oath against modernism which all priests were required to take until the time of Pope Paul VI.  All of the popes up to the time of Vatican II warned about and fought against this terrible scourge that has afflicted so much of the church.

So why have the Popes since the time of Vatican II seemingly dismantled all that their predecessors did in fighting the terrible spiritual disease of Modernism?  Why did Pope Paul VI introduced a New Mass?  Why did Pope Paul VI drop the requirement that priests take an oath against Modernism?  Why did Pope John Paul II allow communion in the hand, altar girls, etc?  Why have we seen so many Catholics actively rebelling against Church authority and still calling themselves "Catholic?"

From Pope St. Pius X

The disease of Modernism, despite the best efforts of the Vatican, had run rampant through many seminaries.  It came into full bloom and infected the laity in 1968 with the publication  of Humanae Vitae, as I wrote in my post about Vatican II, which you can read here.  When soon-to-be Venerable Pope Paul VI released Humanae Vitae and told the Church and the world in no uncertain terms that the use of birth control was and is a mortal sin, subjecting our souls to eternal damnation, there was a major revolt among both the clergy and the laity that continues to this day.   This exactly mirrors the rebellion of the Israelites against Moses and ultimately, against God Himself.

When the vast majority of the Church rose up in rebellion against Pope Paul VI, I believe our Lord looked at us and said, okay, you want to choose your own way, you want to decide for yourselves and take of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and I'm going to let you do it. I have been warning you through the Magesterium for centuries and even more so during the last century, how deadly this decision is, but now you're going to find out firsthand.  Reluctant Sinner wants to blame Pope Paul VI for the fact that "Liturgical abuses went viral soon after the promulgation of the Missal of Paul VI, whilst Marxist ideology and lack of discipline infiltrated seminaries, and priests and nuns abandoned their vocations in droves. And, of course, traditional Catholics were virtually persecuted within their own Church during Montini's  pontificate, as those attached to the 'old Mass' had to metaphorically take to the catacombs!"

A world of difference between a Smart Car
and a Rolls Royce Bentley

The reason all of these evils infiltrated the Church is because this is what the Church wanted.  This is what they asked for when they basically turned their backs on the Vicar of Christ and said, "Later for you, buddy."  As even Reluctant Sinner admits, Pope Paul VI warned us in 1972 that the smoke of Satan had entered the Church.  If we believe the words of Christ, we know that it could not have entered in through the Magesterium.  I believe that since the Pope is guided in everything he does by the Holy Spirit, he was also inspired by the Holy Spirit to take away the beautiful Mass of the Ages and in its place, give us the New Mass, while most certainly a valid Mass, left way too much room for abuse as we saw in the following decades. It was like going from a top of the line Rolls Royce to a Smart Car.  The Smart Car gets you where you want to go, but what a loss.

We wanted to go our own way, and our Lord allowed us to do just that.  The spiritual catastrophe that followed was the result of our own willfulness   We wonder why the Popes since Vatican II have seemed so powerless to stop the rebellion in the Church.  I believe God has held back their hands in order to allow the Church to learn a lesson which she refused to learn any other way.  That is what we have seen in the past 50 years in the Church, and spiritually, it is more destructive than any war has ever been.  Millions and millions of souls have been lost, both spiritually and physically.  To have to stand back and watch this devastation must have caused unbearable suffering in our Popes from Pope Paul VI to Blessed John Paul II to our current Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, and even to John Paul I during his short reign.  I have no doubt that just as Moses pleaded for God to spare the children of Israel, our Holy Fathers have pleaded with Him to spare the Church.

Pope Paul VI and future Pope John Paul II

This comment on Reluctant Sinner' blog echoes my feelings:

Catherine said...
The more I have read of Pope Paul VI's writings in recent years, the more I am totally impressed by him and by his complete dedication to Christ. So if the news is true, then I rejoice, and also think that it is well past time that this courageous witness to the truth of Jesus Christ was honoured like this.18 December 2012 01:53

Pope John Paul I and
future Pope John Paul II

I believe our popes in the 20th Century and now into the 21st Century have been men of remarkable spiritual courage and devotion to our Lord.   They have reigned over a Church that has been as close to complete chaos as we have ever seen in her 2000 year history.  Not only have these popes had to deal with a hateful, anti-God world, but they have had to deal with it in the Body of Christ on a scale never seen before.

Canonization is always a reason to rejoice.  Holy Mother Church is recognizing that one of her children is advancing towards sainthood.  We now have someone else who can intervene on our behalf.   And certainly soon-to-be Venerable Pope Paul VI is acutely aware of the crisis we face on this earth and knows what to ask for.  Let us pray to him that he will go before our Lord and plead that our hearts be softened and turned toward our Savior and His Vicar here on earth.